This is a passage from Baudrillard's book...but I didn't understand it really well...so is it ok if someone clarifies what he's trying to say?

"The truth is not that 'needs are the fruits of production,' but that the system of needs is the product of the system of production, which is a quite different matter. By a system of needs we mean to imply that needs are not produced as a force of consumption, and as a general potential reserve within the larger framework of productive forces. It is in this sense that we can say that the technostructure is extending its empire. The system of production does not "shackle" the system of pleasure to its own ends (strictly speaking, this is meaningless). This hypothesis denies autonomy to the system of pleasure and substitutes itself in its place by reorganizing everything into a system of productive forces. We can trace this genealogy of consumption in the course of the history of the industrial system:

1) The order of production produces the productive machine/force, a technical system that is radically different from traditional tools.
2)It produces the ratinoalized productive capital/force, a rational system of investment and circulation that is radically different from previous forms of "wealth" and modes of exchange.
3) It produces the wage-labor force, n abstracta nd systematized productive force that is radically different from concrete labor and traditional "workmanship".
In this way it produces needs, the system of needs, the productive demand/force as a rationalized, controlled and integrated whole, complementaryto the 3 others in a process of the tottal control of productive forces and production processes. As a system, needs are also radically different from pleasure and satisfaction. They are produced as elemetns of a system and not as a relation between an individual and an object. In the same sense that labor power is no longer connected to, and even denies, the realation of the worker to the product of his labor, so exchange value is no longer related to concrete and personal exchange, nor the commodity form to actual goods, etc.)" (p.45-46)